Yeah, I would think I would be able to get better and more consistent play with my system. I know it is no beast but it is still above average.
I have done upgrades in the past out of want instead of need. Sometimes regretfully so. Now my upgrades are purely out of need.
I ran an i7 920 for 10/11 years. It was a great run.
It’ll be interesting to see if Intel still is king (for gaming) when AMD’s new CPU are released next month. Most recent AMD cpus are closer to intel then they’ve been in a long time. The trade off with intel right now is heat 
1070 still runs Star Citizen tolerable for me, but I’m running with a i7-6700K. So CPU might be better place to upgrade and wait out a 3070 with more memory.
King of gaming anyways, AMD does perform better than Intel in a lot of business/scientific applications.
King of gaming anyways, AMD does perform better than Intel in a lot of business/scientific applications.
Fixed my post - So true, and honestly it’s really close in current gen. And SC is not fully optimized yet. Lastly tech changes so can only every say Intel > AMD for gaming with already released product. AMD’s been killing it this year and friends of mine with these new systems are quite happy with their computers.
1 Like
Let me preface by saying I’m not an expert on pc’s, but find myself in a similar situation (except I don’t have the increase in crashing in 3.10, it is actually a LOT better than 3.9 for me).
Your system is similar to mine.
My system:
i7-4790k - watercooled with aio
MSI Gaming 7 mother board
16g of Ram
RTX 2080ti 11gb
SSD for Star Citizen
Additional info that is crucial: monitor resolution for gaming? I have a multi monitor setup with both 3440x1440 and a 4k monitor. I play SC on the 3440x1440, with mumble and other stuff on the 4k. The game plays fairly smoothly about 95% of the time at almost max settings. I get the typical stuttering around habs that most people get. Other times I get stutter or crappy frame rates, everyone else around me is too, which tells me it’s not my system.
Depending on what resolution you are gaming at will determine where you will see the best bang for your buck. Prior to the 2080ti I was running a GTX 980. After the upgrade I did see a performance upgrade, but it was subtle and not the OMG difference that I was expecting.
In my case my mind is telling me that the best bang for my buck would be RAM. However, investing the amount of money that 32gb of DDR3 would cost into an older system isn’t making a lot of sense.
Soooo, I am looking at the i7-10700k paired with 32gb of ram (in 2 slots for future expansion to 64gb if needed) and an nvme ssd for my SC install. Unfortunately, when I built my system years ago, I used the OEM copy of windows 10 pro, after some researching, I have found out that my copy is too old to have been tied to my Microsoft account and will need to be repurchased for my upgrade (important for budget reasons as it adds another $140 to the overall cost). Hopefully, the only parts I will end up keeping from my old system will be the power supply and vid card. I added in an inexpensive cpu cooler to keep close to my budget (under 1k). I will save up and upgrade it later once I have enough to get a 360 aio and the Core P3 case, as I want to overclock and wall mount my pc.
I finally smartened up and stopped over buying on the Motherboard. It is so easy to over buy on MB’s. Take a really honest look at your system and what future upgrades you will ACTUALLY do, you may not need that $400 MB, just a $180 one.
Here are the parts that are in my list right now:
Intel Core i7-10700K
G.Skill Ripjaws V 32GB
MSI Z490 MPG Gaming Edge
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Crucial P1 1TB SSD 3D QLC NAND M.2 2280 PCIe NVMe
Enermax ETS-T40 CPU Cooler
Grand total - 951 with tax
Sorry for the meandering post. Hopefully, something in here helped
Going cheap on the cooler you may have issues with the 10xxx series. They generate a lot of excess heat. I have issues with a 6700k at times with a better air cooler then that. I hate to think of how a 10700K will perform.
ok, so here’s the low-down on this hoedown:
Newer Rizen chips will absolutely outperform Intel chips in some use case scenarios. They handle multi-thread processing better than Intel, with no doubt. This means that if you are running multi-thread applications (CAD programs, 3D modeling applications, video rendering, etc), on a regular and necessary basis, an AMD chip is going to perform better for you.
Intel chips consistently and reliably outperform AMD in single-thread processing, though, and this is where gaming lives. For a number of reasons, creating games that use a multi-threaded environment is very uncommon and this is likely to remain true for quite some time.
(Please don’t confuse threads with cores)
So you have to ask yourself: What is this new PC going to be used for? If it’s going to be for watching Netflix, basic office applications, web browsing, gaming, basic stuff like that; Go Intel. If it’s going to be used for professional CAD, 3D design, video editing, etc., with gaming as a very secondary goal, go AMD.
Easy peasy, lemon squeezey!
So if someone was going to upgrade a ryzen 5 1600, what would be a good intel to upgrade to?
For a gaming only rig, a safe bet is the 10600K. Pair it with some good RAM though, 3600MHz or more.
1 Like
I can get on board with that.
3200mhz wont work?
It will, but the i5-10600K can make good use of higher speed ram better than previous gen Intels. There is also little if any diff in cost between 3200 and 3600 these days. On occasion I’ll see 4000 or 4400 on sale so that it isn’t too much more.
Even a mild overclock with the 10600K and faster ram can make a difference.